The Washington Post, everybody knows, is gonna vote for Obama; is gonna do everything it can to reelect Obama. Now, I'm sorry, folks, but I can't help it. I live in Realville.... and if I got Ruth Marcus here writing about how she wants Mitch Daniels to run for president and win the Republican nomination but wants Obama to win, then something tells me that she believes that Mitch Daniels would pose not that big a challenge.

Turn it around. Let's say we're all supporters of Ronald Reagan. He's coming up on his second term, and the Democrats tell us that they're going to nominate either Mario Cuomo or Walter Mondull, and we say, "Well, you know what? We really want a good campaign; we want to be entertained here. We think Mondale is good. Mondale, Mondale, that's the guy! Mondale, he'd give Reagan the best run for his money." Who would believe us? If we did something akin to this -- started trying to pick their nominee -- they would accuse us of trying to pick somebody's gonna lose. Here they are, at least the Washington Post, trying to pick our nominee on the basis that it would be boring to have anybody but Mitch be the nominee, and only Mitch stands a chance of winning.

Laura Bush just passed the Bush family blessing onto the Daniels family. Reading this I think of King David who was so good to Bathsheba's loyal husband that he encouraged him lead the charge against the enemy's walls hoping to see him killed, and that's what happened. In that scenario Karl Rove's media helpers will push Mitt and Cheri into a campaign against Obama and then abandon them at a crucial point in the campaign. We shall see how Rove makes that sound so specially smart and noble when he does the Daniels in.

What does Rush know about who can and can not win an election? I remember the man pushing O'Donnell and we all know how that turned out.

Daniels has a good record here in Indiana. I know Rush likes to take cheap shots at him, but Daniels did not quit his job, he did not fail at his job and he did not break any promises. That does not mean he can be president, but why not let the primary voters make that decision?

If Rush does not like the choices maybe he could run himself..after all he is rich and famous and well connected himself.

I heard that Scott Walker said he would support Daniels if he decides to run and so will Chris Christie..are they part of the plot too?

And who would be more likely to beat Obama? Would Rush support Romney? Or Huntsman? Or Newt?

My guess is he would support Palin and what ever little chance Daniels has of winning she has less. Maybe Rush wants Obama to win a second term because having Obama in the White House is good for ratings.

Maybe I just like the way his voice sounds, or his fire-in-the-belly enthusiasm for the country, or his humor and good nature. I started noticing him when the marine sang the last verse of the National Anthem last year at one of Cain's Tea Party rallies. I play that clip a lot.

I heard Cain's name mentioned over and over from callers on a local WMAL show where the host was pushing for Romney. The host just ignored the callers.

Yes, this is the new tactic in undermining the best Republican candidate out there. Get the Mainstream Media Elites to say nice things about that candidate, and then let the Talk Radio Right destroy him.

The economy is a shambles, particularly in bellwether states. Bin Laden's death was the easiest call in human history and will seem like ancient history. Nothing Obama's done has been particularly popular.

As for Bush in 2004, you are simply arriving at the wrong conclusion based on the pertinent facts. John Kerry -- the most unlikeable, charisma-less, charmless, shitty Q-score of a doofus ever to run for president -- came with a few hundred thousand votes of beating W. So did that weirdo Al Gore. Bush's strength was not the issue in Bush's victories.

Althouse should stop listening to Rush*, and start listening to Hannity. He regularly has good (con leaning) pollsters on, two at the same time. He goes through all the possible nominees as he gets opinions re each candidate from the two pollsters. Good info. And, believe it or not, Hannity plays it fairly straight w/o turning everything into a BHO attack. Of course most of the rest of the show is so oriented.

*Of course it'd be fine to keep listening to unabridged Rush if there's time to add some Hannity. For example, I (as time permits) check in w/ both--In fact, I heard Rush live when he discussed this Cheri Daniels thing.

What is it about politics that eventually leaves us with people for President who are so low on the stack of great Americans. I'm not talking just about those currently under consideration, but always, nearly every time.

This Nation is full of amazing people, well experienced with long lists of challenges and accomplishments - proven leaders, but for some reason that seems entirely irrelevant, almost disqualifying.

Rush thinks media liberals like Ruth Marcus are supporting Daniels because they believe Obama can more easily beat Daniels -- I think he is wrong about that -- they just think they could "work" with a Daniels if he did win -- unlike a Cain or a Palin, Daniels will listen to them and care what they think. Rush is right though that the media liberals will turn on Daniels just as viciously as they did on McCain . . .

Ilya Somin, a libertarian young law academic who is part of the Volokh Conspiracy, supported Mitch or his positions some months ago. I have been impressed with Ilya's analyses and have been impressed with Gov. Daniels notwithstanding a judicial appointment he made. A presidential contest is like a heavyweight fight, well maybe welterweight in this instance. You wouldn't expect Muhammad Ali or his handlers to say, 'Don't bring Frazier.' And you wouldn't not bring Frazier if he says, 'I'd like to fight him.'

I agree with Mrs. Bush. We need a boring, sober, solid, man who'll be reasonable and engage in a good solid debate on the issues. None of that populism nonsense or charisma, or getting people excited. I'm sure the working class and poor can't wait to vote for the VAT tax.

I hope Charlie can bring back the glory days of Bush I or Jerry Ford. No "Religious Right" back then, just good solid Republican governance.

The Family has always assumed that Jeb will run in 2016 after two disastrous Obama terms. Jeb will ride in on his white horse and restore the Family Business and the Good Name of Bush.

McCain, as is his wont, screwed that up royallly when he found The Natural out in the backwoods of Alaska. And John McCain enjoys fucking with the Bush Family after what they did to him.

Enter Daniels. One of the Help. After Romney starts imploding, which is happening as we speak, Daniels remains the Last Bushie Standing, He's also the world's worst sucker. There's no way the Bushies actually want Daniels to BEAT Obama, just do well enough to get Republican control of the House secured and a Majority in the Senate.

You Daniels' supporters are in for a rude awakening should Daniels actually beat Palin for the nomination, which he won't. They've already taken their best shots at Palin, and she's still standing.

"Has Herman Cain held a single elective office ever? He will not be president without experience, and he shouldn't be."

A prerequisite of having to have held office prior to entering an election is inconsistent.

President? We can debate that til the cows come home. The current resident IMO was ill-suited yet he was elected. Yes the message and packaging were carefully crafted.

So perhaps the question or the prerequisite rather should be 'does the person have a resume' that suggests an ability to lead?'

I would think that someone like Herman Cain should not be disqualified due to his not holding office. On the contrary, not holding office in the past has advantages, namely, a track record in the real world, not just election results and broken promises.

... and if I got Ruth Marcus here writing about how she wants Mitch Daniels to run for president and win the Republican nomination but wants Obama to win, then something tells me that she believes that Mitch Daniels would pose not that big a challenge.

Mitch Daniels is arguably the most conservative governor in the country right now. The changes he's made to Indiana are not minor. He's no RINO. He's bright red Republican.

I know, I know, he's not Sarah Palin. That means some people will pretend he's some kind of squish.

If you consider what he's accomplished, turning a sagging state into a business friendly low tax state with more jobs, via conservative leadership, perhaps you'll see why other Republicans really respect the guy.

He's not the best politician, and I'd hesitate to nominate him, but he's no RINO. That's freaking ridiculous.

I live in Indiana and I have not heard one word about that court case. I don't know if libertarians are being honest about it or not, or if they are going off the deep end.

But blaming Daniels for the ruling of one judge he appointed seems ridiculous to me. After all, Reagan was Governor for 8 years and President for 8 years and that is a lot of judges. So far as I know libertarians have not judged him based on every decision made be every judge.

BTW, some people say that the issue in the Indiana case is lawful and unlawful entry and the homeowner has the right to go after the police in court if they feel the entry was unlawful.

It seems to me that a lot of people who say that the media is picking our candidate by saying nice things about Daniels {once or twice}, but in truth a lot of people on the right are allowing the media to pick the candidate by assuming the only person they can support is someone the media does not like.

That means Palin of course, the media is nasty to her so that means all conservatives must support her.

I disagree. What do people want Daniels to do? Quit his job and jump on his harley and drive around Indiana doing a reality TV show? Maybe a facebook page, speaking engagements with high fees, book tours?

The truth is Daniels is a hard working competent and honest executive. I am not saying he can win the nomination, but turning on him just because the media likes him better than Palin is ridiculous. Either way, you are letting them pick the candidate.